The budget for "The Eternal" was $2000 and it was used to pay the talent. Here in the Lexington, KY area, there is a plethora of super talented actors and actresses who are willing to work for the screen credit or at least for only their travel expenses. I don't know how the talent situation is in the Orlando area, although I do know that Full Sail is based out of Orlando, which has a killer film department, and there is a growing film presence in Orlando and Miami—both of which tend to attract talented actors and actresses. The talent in "The Eternal" warranted some compensation for their time, but I didn't feel the performance from any of them was worth an accumulated $2000. If you’re going to be paying the talent, make sure that they can do a solid job performing before you sign them.
The next time James D. Watkins has $2000 to spend on a short film I would suggest investing in a quality shotgun microphone and boom pole to increase the audio quality and thereby increasing the overall production quality of your film, investing in a basic light kit with gels and stands (soft boxes too, if you can-I'm a big fan of soft boxes), and finally investing in an editing platform that will give you more control and more options (Adobe Production Premium and Apple Final Cut Studio, are both under $2000, but they have basic versions of the editing programs that can give you decent editing control for $200 or less).
I'm aware that it’s not possible to get the best of all of those things for $2000, but pick one to do as well as you can and then at least improve the other two with what you have left. Then get something better for the next film, etc. until you have the tools to make a good quality production. I know that some people would say to invest in a higher end camera, but I don't agree. Eventually, an improved camera is a good idea, but if you improve the quality in the other areas it won't matter what you shoot it with because it will look like you're on the ball. Eventually invest in a higher end prosumer camera, sure, but the other stuff is more important and more financially viable at first. (Audio is especially crucial. Audiences clamored to sit through the Blair Witch Project with jerky visuals but properly mastered audio, whereas there are thousands of gorgeous high-def movies that won’t see the light of day because they have awful audio and no audience will sit through awful audio.)
Eventually, you'll get to a place where you need to pay your talent more, but hopefully you'll have more money to work with at that point. So, in the mean time, find people that will do quality work for little to no money (they're out there, you just have to look) and invest the bulk of your budget into the smaller items I mention to increase the overall quality of your films.
A final note, similar to what I've mentioned in other sections, it is a good investment to drop a few bucks into books and manuals that will help you become a better filmmaker/director/actor/writer. Just to recap those books: Lew Hunter's Screenwriting 434, The Writer's Journey, Save the Cat, Save the Cat Goes to the Movies, Horror Screenwriting: The Nature of Fear, The Power of the Actor, You Can Act, Motion Picture and Video Lighting, and Filmmaking for Dummies. Any and all of these will help give you an edge in the art of making films, both shorts and features.
"The Eternal" has no lasting appeal. It is, in essence, the same horror storyline we have heard several times before about spirits of the dead haunting the living. There's no new spin on it to make it stand out and the storytelling is messy and, at times, convoluted.
The issues that I've mentioned in the body of this critique also serve to make "The Eternal" a difficult movie to enjoy since the viewer is constantly being taken from the story by unrealistic sounding dialogue, unneeded jump cuts, glitches, hums and buzzes in the audio, poor visual effects, etc. The truth is that the only reason I watched it twice was because I had to do so in order to provide enough feedback to try to help with the next project.
I know this has been a negative review, so let me say that making your film is half the battle and the fact that you've gotten it onto a DVD is an accomplishment. So, kudos. Many people never get their idea out of their head, let alone into a finished product.
In the course of doing this critique, I learned that this is not the first film that James D. Watkins has submitted for critique. Two years ago, MFM’s editor-in-chief, Jeremy Hanke, critiqued another of Watkins' films, Soul Decision. Here's why I bring this up: Mr. Hanke said many of the same things two years ago that I am saying now. The whole point of allowing us to critique a film is to learn, grow, and make your next film better than the last. Making the next better than the last is something that we should all strive for in our filmmaking (or whatever you do), but in order to do that you have to change the things that aren't working. Pointing out the flaws in a film is not our attempt to be rude or demeaning or to in any way imply that we have "arrived." Our purpose is to help you make your future projects the best that they can be.
So in the meantime, keep learning, keep writing, keep making films, and be constantly looking for ways to improve what you're doing.
